[ga-abuse] personal attack by WXW

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

The following posting contains several personal attacks against Patrick
Corliss, the alt-chair.
Personal attacks against chairs are generally intended to provoke them
further and harm the whole list.

Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 00:14:01 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.51) Business
Reply-To: "William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <9014207803.20010515001401@userfriendly.com>
To: "Patrick Corliss" <patrick@corliss.net>
CC: "[ga-roots]" <ga-roots@dnso.org>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga-roots] Proposed Wording Changes OR Can We Get Back on
Track Perhaps?
In-Reply-To: <02f101c0dd0b$3784c240$b33efea9@hamza>
References: 

<5.0.2.1.2.20010513142100.04058ca0@oak.higgs.net><5.0.2.1.2.20010514123709.0
31012e0@oak.higgs.net><022701c0dd02$d40f00c0$b33efea9@hamza>
 <1839953303.20010514230307@userfriendly.com>
 <02f101c0dd0b$3784c240$b33efea9@hamza>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-ga-roots@dnso.org
Precedence: bulk
X-Envelope-To: terastra@terabytz.co.nz
X-UIDL: f7c0fd37511ad706c8feb803bc2882de

Hello Patrick,

Monday, May 14, 2001, 11:49:40 PM, Patrick Corliss wrote:

>>
>> I'm just noting that I intend to ask for sanctions against Patrick for
>> the above post.
> 
> It's a fair comment, William, not a personal attack.

No, it's not a fair comment, Patrick. I was most certainly an
inappropriate personal attack, and much less than the type of comments
Eric Deiker was recently banned for.

> The facts remain that the only people (and they number very few) who want to
> retain any "existing policy" come out of this group are those who stand to
> personally benefit from it (i.e., existing TLD operators).

This is an outright lie. Having to resort to lies to back up your
positions now, Patrick?

Not surprising, really.

[deliberate insult]


>> For the record, Mr Corliss, the reason I have been away is because of
>> carrier problems here in my area, which resulted in my switching
>> carriers for my personal dedicated connectivity, and recent medical
>> difficulties, neither of which are any of your damn business.

> You took 14 minutes to reply to my posting at 11:00 pm at night.  It would
> have taken you much of that time to write your response.

No, I type much faster than that, Mr Corliss.

> Whilst I am sorry
> to hear about your medical condition, it is a further diversion.   I said
> you "jump in quick" and post - you just proved that I am correct.

> I don't need you to swear at me for pointing out the truth.

No, Patrick, it wasn't a diversion.  It was answering the
inappropriate accusation and insinuation you made about my lack of
recent participation.

Trust me, Patrick, if I swore at you, you'd know it.

For now, I'll just recognize that you are resorting to outright lies
to back up your little personal agenda, 

[this is an unacceptable slur]


which has nothing resembling
broad support that would be required for it to be even considered for
a consensus position.

You can't even defend the need for your proposal.

Pathetic, Patrick.

I expected more from someone as learned as you.

-- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh
mailto:william@userfriendly.com
Owner, Userfriendly.com
Userfriendly.com Domains
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net